Housing project deduction depends on real development control, not land ownership, under section 80IB(10).

Deduction under section 80IB(10) was upheld where the assessee was the real developer of the housing project, despite the land not standing in its name and the sale deed being executed in favour of the co-operative society with the assessee as confirming party. The tribunal noted that the assessee had arranged the project, obtained plan approval, borne land and incidental costs, engaged contractors, and exercised dominant control over development and completion. Ownership of the land was not treated as a statutory precondition when the assessee assumed the commercial risks and rewards of development, consistent with jurisdictional precedent. The Revenue's challenge failed and the appellate relief was affirmed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of the housing project notwithstanding that the land was not in its name and the sale deed was executed in favour of the co-operative society with the assessee shown as a confirming party.

Analysis: The assessee established that it had arranged the project, obtained plan approval, borne the land cost and incidental expenses, engaged contractors, and exercised dominant control over the development and completion of the housing project. The finding was that ownership of the land was not a statutory condition precedent for the allowance of deduction where the assessee had actually developed the housing project and assumed the relevant commercial risks and rewards. The view taken was consistent with the applicable jurisdictional precedent that a housing project developer may qualify for the deduction even if the land or development permission stands in another name, so long as the assessee is the real developer of the project.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10), and the Revenue's challenge to the relief granted by the appellate authority failed.

Final Conclusion: The appellate order granting the housing project deduction was affirmed on the footing that the assessee was the developer of the project and not disqualified merely because the land stood in the name of the society.

Ratio Decidendi: For deduction under section 80IB(10), ownership of land is not a prerequisite if the assessee is the developer having dominant control over and responsibility for the housing project.

---